'Constitution Teacher' Loses Her Mind When Challenged Over Separation Of Church & State

Many are familiar with Bradlee Dean. He is the founder of You Can Run International, a Christian ministry that seeks to fight for the youth of our land by going into public, government-run indoctrination centers and proclaiming the history of America, teaching the Constitution and the law of God and presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ. He also contributes articles to Freedom Outpost as well. Recently, members of his organization were not only verbally assaulted, but physically assaulted by a self-proclaimed Constitutional teacher, who just couldn't stand to be challenged over the idea of Separation of Church & State, which is nowhere found in the United States Constitution. Watch the short clip below (The full version is at the bottom of the article).

The incident was captured on video by members of Dean's ministry at a local 7-11 gas station in Florida.

"Ilse was standing behind one of her ministry's tables while distributing Christian literature to those visiting the gas station. She simply said, 'Hello,' to the woman, but after approaching and reading the sign on the ministry's table that said, 'Support Christianity in Public Schools, The Constitution, and Honoring Soldiers,' the woman viciously attacked the cause by screaming 'shame on you for wanting Christianity in schools,' calling Miss Ilse a 'bigot,' and [she] stated that 'Christians are the problem.'"

She threatens to call police, then yelled, "I'll tell police you are not just harassing, but are assaulting me." Then she blasts the cameraman with her bag.

She speeds off, but returns a short time later to talk with police. She doesn't approach the ministry table again, but the police asked the ministry workers if they wanted to press charges against her. The ministry and Dean have not decided whether to press charges as of yet.

This alleged indoctrinator of America's children made the enormous mistake of demonstrating why she should not be teaching and, more specifically, why she should not be teaching the Constitution to anyone! Her claim that there is a separation of Church & State in the Constitution is quite laughable. I'm sure she would appeal to the First Amendment, if she could learn to control herself. However, the First Amendment is clear:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

In other words, the restraints are on Congress, not on the people. Congress is not allowed to establish a national religion, nor are they allowed to write laws to prohibit the free exercise of practicing religion among other things. However, the people and the Church are able to influence the government. There is no restraint on them to do so.

We know that liberals would take the words "separation of Church & State" from Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists to bolster their claim of separation. First read what the Danbury Baptists wrote to Jefferson here. Understand that their concern was over government doing what it is currently doing and that is seeking to tell the Church what it can and cannot do. Here's what Jefferson wrote (read the full text here):

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

Notice that Jefferson expressly said who was prohibited: Congress and the Executive, not the people. Additionally, here is the Executive (President) at the time, ending his letter with "I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem." Imagine that! I don't believe Jefferson was a Christian for many reasons. However, it is clear that he wasn't saying that Christians could not influence government, but that the Federal government was to be restrained from having anything to do with the affairs of the Church or the freedom of Christians to practice their beliefs both privately and publicly as their conscience dictated.

These two young people were simply attempting to correct the woman above and the woman was unwilling to receive correction.

Bradlee Dean's ministry You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International reaches out to America's next generation "through principles of morality, true freedom, and personal responsibility."

The organization explains its mission is to "equip our next generation with the Christian values that made America great through a unique avenue of music and educational event forums in colleges, schools, churches, festivals, and arenas."

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.